|
New South Wales |
Case Name: | Surgibit IP Holdings Pty Limited v Ellis (No 3) |
Medium Neutral Citation: | [2017] NSWSC 1479 |
Hearing Date(s): | On the papers |
Date of Orders: | 27 October 2017 |
Decision Date: | 27 October 2017 |
Jurisdiction: | Common Law |
Before: | Adamson J |
Decision: | (1) Order the first defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings. |
Catchwords: | COSTS – no reason to depart from general rule that costs follow the event – no question of principle |
Legislation Cited: | Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 42.1 |
Category: | Costs |
Parties: | Surgibit IP Holdings Pty Limited (ACN 110 194 628) |
Representation: | Counsel: |
File Number(s): | 2015/84790 |
JUDGMENT
I delivered reasons for judgment in this matter on 11 October 2017: Surgibit IP Holdings Pty Limited v Ellis (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1379 and ordered judgment in the sum of $1,131,891 (the calculation of which was agreed) on 18 October 2017.
The plaintiff seeks its costs of the proceedings. The first defendant does not consent to an order that he pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings. Both parties agree that the appropriate costs order should be determine on the papers.
Although the first defendant does not consent to an order that he pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings, he has raised no reason why costs ought not follow the event.
The first defendant opposed the enforcement of a foreign judgment on the basis that it contained a penal element and ought not be enforced by this Court. I rejected that argument in respect of each of the amounts claimed by the plaintiff (triple damages and attorneys fees). As the plaintiff has been wholly successful, I am not persuaded that there is any reason to depart from the usual consequence that costs follow the event: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 42.1.
For these reasons I make the following order:
(1)Order the first defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings.
**********
- AGLC
- Surgibit IP Holdings Pty Limited v Ellis (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 1479
- Case
- [2017] NSWSC 1479
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether there were any principles or circumstances that would justify a departure from the standard approach to costs in this case. It was noted that there was no question of principle that necessitated such a departure. The court emphasised that the general rule of costs following the event was a fundamental principle in Australian law and should be adhered to unless there were exceptional circumstances present.
In reaching its decision, the court relied on established legal principles and jurisprudence. It was held that the party that had prevailed in the proceedings was entitled to costs in accordance with the general rule. The court found that there were no exceptional circumstances that warranted a departure from this principle. The court's reasoning was grounded in the need to maintain consistency and predictability in the legal system.
The final orders of the court confirmed that the prevailing party was entitled to costs in accordance with the general rule. No departure from the standard approach to costs was warranted in this case, and the costs were to follow the event. The court's decision reinforced the importance of adhering to established legal principles in the allocation of costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.